I remember huddling around my friend’s laptop with several friends on November 4, 2008. We were hopeful, but didn’t really believe a black man could become President of the United States. Not yet. When he did, we literally took to the streets of our small town singing “God Bless, America.” Hope had won.

When it became apparent in summer 2016 that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic nominee for President, I was conflicted. I had been wrong about America’s ability to elect a black man, but as a woman living in this country I knew in subtle and not so subtle forms that sexism and misogyny is alive and well here. Still, hope had one victory, so I allowed myself to get excited that a woman might finally lead America. We saw how that turned out.

So, how did a former Senator and Secretary of State lose to a bankrupt reality TV star? Hundreds, if not thousands, of think pieces have been written about this subject since last November. Many, especially those written by men, look at the campaign’s lack of ground game. Fair point, but Trump didn’t even have organizers in every state. When you strip it all away, it comes down to the fact she was a woman.

From the get-go, as a former Secretary of State, Senator, architect of a healthcare plan, and successful lawyer Hillary Clinton still wasn’t good enough. In comments and conversation, she was a “bitch” or worse for being involved in politics, for making the tough decisions men are supposed to make. Trump called for her to be locked up for doing her job as Secretary of State and made it a platform during the campaign, ignoring the long history in our country of peaceful transitions without abuse of power to punish challengers. His supporters latched on the “Lock her up!” battle cry, including soon to be National Security advisor Michael Flynn (now under investigation). Demeaning and undermining her accomplishments has always been par for the course, and American politics have not only allowed it, they have made it the status quo.

It pains me to start with this, but merely getting dressed has always been all the media and critics have needed to attack Hillary Clinton. When she was First Lady, a completely allowable attack was her headbands and scrunchies. Journalists of all stripes commented on the “trend” while she was working to try and reform health care during her husband’s first term. Senator Hillary Clinton’s “boring” pantsuit was a sign of her not being feminine enough. Well, until 2007 at least, when she wore a shirt under one suit was noted to show cleavage. “There wasn’t an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.” The Washington Post, a newspaper of note, reported at the time. Numerous articles were written about the suits. Television talk shows spent hours discussing them. As women often do, Clinton eventually leaned into it and even went on David Letterman’s show and made jokes about them herself.

In 2015, when the 2016 Presidential election was already making headlines, pundits once again focused on her clothing. A secret Facebook group called Pantsuit Nation eventually sprang up to take ownership of the obsession with Clinton’s wardrobe. It is easy to downplay and minimize this behaviour, but it is a small but meaningful way women are demeaned and marginalized.

While pundits like to put blame for the vitriol, if they even see any, of the 2016 elections on Trump and his supporters, it is far more institutionalized. Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy released a study after last year’s elections that showed the media focused more on Clinton’s “controversies,” as the study referred to the negative events, than Trump’s in the election. While the percentage difference was only 4%, the coverage mattered. The narrative for Clinton almost solely focused on “the emails” while Trump’s multitude of controversies were briefly discussed until the next one came along to overshadow the last. From the study, “Clinton’s badgering had a laser-like focus. She was alleged to be scandal-prone. Clinton’s alleged scandals accounted for 16 percent of her coverage—four times the amount of press attention paid to Trump’s treatment of women and sixteen times the amount of news coverage given to Clinton’s most heavily covered policy position.” The media chose to report on an “the emails,” even after countless of GOP led hearings yielded nothing- all while Trump’s blatantly sexist comments and terrible treatment of women were passing stories and not viewed with the same intensity. This was the media as whole, including the allegedly liberal bias publications, giving a man who was caught on tape make lewd comments and had multiple accusers speak out about his actions a free pass.

Looking back a year later, seeing the havoc Trump is already wreaking, the narrative has sadly not changed. When Clinton dared to share her experiences as a woman in international politics the same media turned up to tear her apart again. Numerous Op-Eds questioning how she could dare to share her thoughts flooded social media and chat shows. Bernie Sanders released a book the week after the election and was met with no push-back. Clinton publishes a memoir a year later and she is branded as a sore loser and/or someone who should not even consider being part of the conversation anymore.

Amy Shamroe, publishing professional and Traverse City City Commissioner (elected), Michigian, USA.

Sixty years ago, 41% of women voted for the first time on the first plebiscite for peace that gave legitimacy to the ‘National Front’, in which the liberal and the conservative parties agreed upon to share power, as an attempt to put an end to the fratricide bloodshed of the “Violence” period. On 1st December Colombia will be commemorating the 60th anniversary of women’s vote but this relative long history of participation as voters has not yet translated into political equality. Elected women represents only 20% in the National Parliament, less than 10% as provincial governors and less than 15% as mayors in the municipalities and as city councillors.[i] This low representation contrasts with other Latin American countries for example Bolivia (47,2% in the Senate and 53% in the Low Chamber). Even though there exist some legislation to promote women’s political participation, as the quota law and the Law 1475/2011 that rules political parties, there remain many barriers that prevents their participation mostly nurtured by the sexism embedded in political parties male-dominated leadership: lack of training for female militants, lack of funding to their political campaigns, not access to media, etc.

A study released in March 2017, undertaken among elected women, showed that 63% of the respondents (N=166) were victims of political violence. The major reported form of political violence is psychological, mostly exerted by their male peers, even from their same political party. The acts reported were in the form of dismissal of their arguments, threats against their children or relatives, rumours of infidelity, physic and verbal abuse. The most frequent was to restrict their voices, including by turning off the microphones while they were addressing the floor. These acts of violence were considered by themselves as ‘the natural price they have to pay for being elected women. As result of these acts some of them resigned from office or abandoned politics for ever. [ii]

This year with the implementation of the peace agreement with the FARC insurgency, the level of political violence against human rights defenders, social activists and demobilized ex-combatants have increased as the territories formerly controlled by the FARC have been taken over by right-wing militias and the State is not yet ensuring security in those areas as has been agreed. Between 2016 to September 2017, 200 social leaders and human rights defenders have been killed in Colombia.[iii] In our region, South-West Colombia, many social leaders (both women and men) have been killed in 2017 mostly among Afro-Colombians and indigenous peoples. Last month, threats of political violence were reported by the Executive Director of the Union Patriotica, who received death threats by right-wing militias both to herself and the members of her party, if the UP were to contest the 2018 elections.[iv] The second chapter of the peace agreement encompasses measures by the State to the protection of social activists, human rights defenders and opposition leaders and to neutralised right-wing militias.

This second chapter focuses on political participation and includes a political reform. It establishes 16 special circumscriptions for peace to represent the rural citizens of 170 municipalities (15 million people) that have been affected by the armed-conflict. This is a window of opportunity to political equality, as each list to contest these post-conflict seats should be composed by a man and a woman whose names should be put forward by mid-December. The chances for a woman to be elected in these constituencies will be slim due to the rampant machismo; however, as women political activists, we are vigilant and working hard to ensure there will be some rural women elected on 11 March 2017. For this political reform, women political activists proposed to the special electoral mission the adoption of the zipper system (50% women and 50% men alternately in party lists) for the forthcoming elections 2018 /2019. Unfortunately, the national parliament postponed this proposal to be enacted in 2026. This is another form of institutional violence against women politicians and activists working towards political equality in the electoral law just ad-portas of the commemoration of the 60th anniversary of women’s vote in Colombia.

Some people say that whoever pays for the bills, states the rules. And if we look at the political world of Puerto Rico and compare it with our economic statistics we know that it is almost impossible for women to be in a position of command today or in the next week. We are the group with the highest percentage of families under the poverty level. When it comes to have access to positions of power, it is also evident that not only the educational level that we reached is considered. Our biological sex determines social expectations around us, what stereotypes are used to judge us, what excuses are used to sexually assault us, and how likely is that our couple will abuse or murder us. Violence against women is much more than being hit, it is also a social platform apparatus that deprives us of opportunities for development and basic human rights.

When we lack basic human rights, like the right to the housing, to food, to education, health or work, our capacity for action is limited by a routine for survival that rarely leaves space for access to public and political spaces of the countries where we live. “What will give food to my family? Where will we live next week? How do I get to my work? What can I do with my children if schools are closed? How can I find a doctor to diagnose my symptoms? Where can I find a job that pays enough to cover the needs of my family?” These are just some of the questions that populate the heads of a high percentage of women in Puerto Rico.

Even women who have attained a higher educational level and employment, have dilemmas that need to be resolved before aspiring to public office. In Puerto Rico we lack a structure of social or governmental support to facilitate the raising of our children through quality care centres or schools with schedules that recognize the reality of working mothers. We are still pretty far from having family structures where the fair division of household chores is a reality.

As a woman, you have to be in a very particular economic and social niche to say with confidence that you are ready and have the necessary conditions to make the leap from the domestic space to the political arena. Even from that space, which we see as one of privilege, it is not easy to overcome obstacles and violence that represents a constant menace for women in the public world. Our morale, intelligence, leadership and even our form of dressing is always questioned and criticized.

Although women are 50% of humanity, our presence is scarce in political bodies, governments and economic leadership of the planet. On average, we are no more than 25% of the legislative bodies of the planet. According to UN Women, only 7.2% of women are head of state in the world. In Puerto Rico, 14 of 80 legislators are women (17.5%). If we look again and evaluate each of the fourteen women legislators we have today from a gender perspective and in the light of their history of working for other women, we would have to conclude that women in Puerto Rico do not have representation in the legislature. I say this because in assessing the participation of women in politics and the public sphere, it is not enough to look at their biological sex, we have to look at their commitment to equality and their understanding about what is gender perspective.

When we talk about women in the political field, there are two important elements that collide with each other. On the one hand, we are a group consistently studied by advertising agencies to learn how to sell us political parties and their candidates. On the other hand, beyond wanting to win our vote, for many of those political parties there is no real interest in advancing an agenda of equality for us. We are the most desirable voters and at the same time, the group most despised at the time of distributing rights.

It is necessary, however, to look beyond what has been considered “politics”. Feminism and the LGBT activism have given us some good lessons because they have been able to work beyond partisan politics tied to electoral processes and have worked politically influencing social processes to advance their own agendas. To the horror of conservative groups who hate to see the women gaining the space they deserve and LGBT people reclaiming their humanity against the discrimination, our work has been paying off.

In the case of women, to reach 2016 elections in Puerto Rico with candidates and parties which fully supported our rights was not coincidence. At the beginning of the 20th century, we had to fight for the mere right to vote. In the 70’s, we had to work a reform of the Civil Code to achieve equal rights in marriage. In the 80’s we achieved legislation to prohibit domestic violence and sexual assault in marriages. In the 2000’s, economic development began to acquire importance on our agenda: with poverty in the center of our lives, there is no way to have equality. We have also achieved important rights related to sexual orientation and gender identity. All that work was political and, in this new decade, we are now ready to cross the borders of the electoral world and go into the spaces of power where decisions that affect not only women, but their families and their communities are made. If we are 50% of the population, we must also be 50% of those who make the decisions.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the election of 2016, we only had a 20% nominations of women versus 80% of men. In the case of the LGBT communities, as in past elections, we had candidates who have been open about their sexual orientation and that it is a breakthrough.

If we take a closer look at this picture and study platforms, proposals and the history of some parties and candidates of 2016, we can conclude that there was a real opportunity to change numbers and alter the proportion of representation of women and LGBT communities in our Government. Unfortunately, candidates who have attacked our rights prevailed. In part, because they have big-budget campaigns and it was difficult to overcome gender stereotypes. Many people still think that women must be at home and not leading in public spaces. We are still subject to a harsher evaluation than men and it is a disadvantage in politics where double standards cost votes. In the case of LGBT candidates another challenge is the direct attack of anti LGBT groups and religious fundamentalisms.

Is the political world a space of violence for women? Definitely yes. Not only is there violence in the double standards used to evaluate us that I have just mentioned. There is evidence and we know cases in which the manifestations of violence directly affect women candidates or that occupy public spaces from government offices, social movements or media. This does not mean that we should give up to a reality that we can and we must transform.

In a discussion on this topic held by the Organization Proyecto Matria in 2015, activists, students and workers identified some of the forms of violence suffered by women in public spaces and proposed concrete actions to counteract this violence. Some of them have already been mentioned in this column, but worth noting how the attacks on reputation, the fear of losing economic spaces and threats from private individuals or Government officials represent major concerns for every woman that wants to aspire to public office in Puerto Rico. These fears are not unfounded. In the past years we have seen the publication of private photos of public officials, election campaigns that make reference to sexual orientation or morals of candidates, defamatory campaigns in social networks and the persecution of activists by Government officials who have been confronted because of their incompetence or human rights violations. Coping with these challenges which add to the ones we already have in our lives long before considering a political career is hard enough and a good reason to think it twice.

Some of the proposals made by discussion group of Matria, and others found in a research on the subject, give us some keys that can be considered for future actions aimed to change and improve the situation of women in the public and political world of Puerto Rico. These same recommendations are probably good for other countries. For example, using tactics of reframing was one recommendation. What is it? To alter the meaning of a fact or situation by changing or clarifying its context and proposing a reinterpretation. Other proposals include the work of a common agenda of rights for women in the country and promote it directly with women candidates so they take them beyond the borders of their parties and generate a discourse that strengthens its presence in public spaces. It is also recommended to have a communication strategy that allows the continuous monitoring of media and social networks to achieve coordinated responses beyond the immediate circle of the candidate or of women occupying public positions. It is important to send the message that they are not alone or an easy prey for the machinery that tries to put us again in domestic and apolitical spaces.

Human rights include the right to participate in the decisions that affect our lives and our families. That is politics. That is equality and development for us all.

1960: The world’s first female Prime Minister, Sirimavo Bandaranaike, elected

1994: The country’s first female president, Chandrika Kumaratunga, elected

Present: Lowest female representation in politics in South Asia

Sri Lankan women gained the right to vote 17 years before the country gained independence from the British. The country elected the world’s first female Prime Minister and the fifth President of country was female. Women have made rapid advances in education, healthcare and their participation in the paid economy has been immense; however, little or no progress has been made with respect to their representation in the national legislature.

It is alarming how women go unrecognized in the most important decision making processes in the country. The Asian region has some of the lowest levels of women’s participation in national parliament, amongst them Sri Lanka is one of the lowest. Timor-Leste has 32.3% of women in parliament, Nepal 29.6% and Bangladesh 20.3% while Sri Lanka is at 5.3% and the nomination list has never increased beyond 6% for women.[i] Thus Civil Society Organizations (CSO) especially women’s rights activist from across the country have campaigned since the 1990s for a quota system for women in all political institutions.[ii] Although there wasn’t a backlash from the government or political parties towards these CSOs and women’s rights activist, quota system proposals consistently faced a dead-end.

The quota and what it entails

Following persistent lobbying and campaigning with every government, opposition party and political parties since the 1990s, the women’s movement in Sri Lanka marked a monumental milestone on 7th July 2017, when the Government of Sri Lanka gazetted the Provincial Councils Elections (Amendment) Bill to increase the number of female representatives in Provincial Councils. As the first step, the Government amended the Local Authorities Election Act to include 25% quota for women at the local government elections.[iii] Thus for the first time, a prospective 2000 women will contest in the upcoming local government election in January-February 2018 alongside their male counterparts. To influence local legislature, dismantled gender stereotypes and finally start seeing women as equals.

What’s stopping her?

Sri Lankan women share many common barriers with women in other South Asian countries which prevent them from entering into their country’s formal political spheres. These include: cultural values, the perceptions of politics as a male domain and women’s double or triple burden of work, lack of family support and balancing responsibilities as a mother and wife all stand as obstacles. The most significant factor however restricting women from entering politics in Sri Lanka is Sexual and Gender Based Violence (SGBV).

Sexism is so deeply rooted within the political structure and society making it almost impossible for women to break through glass ceiling and emerge as true leaders and furthermore be accepted as politicians. Upon entering politics women encounter harassment, intimidation, threats, financial pressure and in some cases sexual bribery to even include her name in the nomination list. Negative campaign material targeting women are commonly spread through various forms of mainstream and social media to undermine and sabotage her participation, of which character assassination and objectification of female candidates are the most common. This further disempowers and discourages grassroots level women leaders from entering politics as lack of funding and increase in care burdens becomes trivial compared to the SGBV she will face when getting into politics. Many female leaders fear they may lose their current social status within the community if they enter politics as it will create further space to target her and tarnish her reputation. The aforementioned ground level realities prevent female community leaders and activists from making an entrance to local political bodies.

The existing patriarchal social structure puts unfair pressure not just on prospective candidates but female politicians alike. They are constantly criticised and their political careers are always evaluated as a justification tool used to validate or dismiss the need for women in the political arena while their male counterparts face no such pressure. Apart from family commitments, lack of financial support and increase in women’s care responsibilities one of the key factors restricting female leaders from all socio-economic backgrounds is the SGBV they face upon entering politics which not only affects her but her entire family and social circle. This significantly hinders women’s participation and feeds into the stereotype that politics is a man’s domain.

The way forward

Sri Lanka currently stands at a pivotal juncture, taking one of the first steps towards encouraging the increase of women’s participation in the political arena. While making policies to promote women’s representation in politics is extremely important it would not be effective if an enabling environment wasn’t created in parallel. It will be ineffective if the country’s political climate, attitude of its citizens and the overall absence of an enabling environment are not favourable and safe for women to come to the political forefront.

“I was arrested on 19th March 2012 while I was at the Maldivian Democratic Party Office by two police women. They just came and handcuffed me behind and the cuffs were very tight. They took me first to the police HQ and then they transferred me to Dhoonidhoo Island. I was handcuffed. They made me give a urine sample in front of them. They then took me to another room and made me take off my clothes and did a body check. I was kept in a police cell there at the detention centre and released the next day.” A. Muna

“On 19th March 2012 I was near the MDP Office when the police came and grabbed me. I said, “Don’t hurt me please. If you want to handcuff me and I will go willing with you; please don’t hurt me.” And the police replied “We will do it.” One of the civilians there told the police that I had just had a small baby and not to take me. The police responded, “We will take her and we will kill her.” They then beat me and one of them grabbed my breasts. The police them sprayed by mouth and eyes with pepper spray.” I lost consciousness and when I regained it, I was inside the police jeep. …I told them don’t beat me. It wasn’t long ago I had a baby by Caesarian section. When I said that the police hit me on my stomach where I had my C-section with their fist. I cried out in pain.” – Y. Hussain

These are just a couple of extracts from the cases submitted to the UN in 2012 regarding what took place during an opposition protest in 2012.

The February coup of 2012 which led to the overthrow of the first democratically elected government led to a galvanising of female political activism in the country. Day after day women came out onto the streets of the capital to protest against the overthrow of the government as well as the diminishing of democratic political space. However, it also led to Maldivian women political activists facing the rough end of police brutality as they had never witnessed in the past.

Women protesters were repeatedly pepper sprayed, tear gassed, sprayed by water cannon and taken into custody. While this did not appear to stop women from participating in protests in the wake of the coup, since the elections of 2013, the government has repeatedly refused to allow protests and demonstrations from taking place at all. Those who have dared to participate have often been harshly punished. One such case is that of Nasira, a mother of two who threw an empty plastic bottle at a police cordon during one such protest and was jailed for five years. She was subsequently released after being in prison for over two years.

Women’s representation in politics and top government posts is very low in the Maldives with only five female MPs in the 85-member parliament and only three female cabinet ministers. A 2015 survey by the NGO, Transparency Maldives found that Maldivians believe that men make better political leaders than women. However, the survey also showed that compared to a survey in 2013, more people disagreed that men make better leaders, depicting a slight change in attitudes.

Despite low political participation, the survey showed that support for women in politics, especially as parliamentarians, cabinet ministers and councillors remained high. Of those surveyed, 84 percent supported women being parliamentarians, 79 % for cabinet ministers and 82 per cent for councillors. While attitudes for female political participation and activism appeared strong, the discrepancy between attitudes and actual participation indicates that there are other factors hindering women’s participation in politics. When asked why there were so few female MPs, 30 % stated that society does not want women as political leaders.

While political participation at the top level remains low, women continue to play a role in political parties mainly at grassroots level in the form of organizing campaign rallies, attending meetings and assisting in door-to-door activities. Women often explain their involvement at grassroots level as being easier for them as it is sporadic and does not demand full time involvement.

The change in attitudes, if any, and the level of women’s involvement in formal politics of Maldives will be evident in the next couple of years as Maldives faces a general election in 2018 and a parliamentary election in 2019. At the same time, there is also the risk of political repression and imprisonment of those who dare oppose the current regime, both that may result in once again women being pushed to the periphery of politics.

In the public sphere, wherever and whenever, the women activists are backed by organisational strength and are a part of collective, they have been effect in their efforts and have a safety net. But if the women activist is isolated, there is threat of backlash, she is verbally abused, socially boycotted and physically-emotionally-psychologically harmed and faces continuous witch-hunting from the community. Women’s movement’s slogan, “Women United Will Never be defeated” and “There is Strength in Numbers”. Hence we must promote “cluster approach” in fighting for women’s rights.

How significant is the presence of women in formal politics in your country?

If women’s agenda has to be centre-stage, women’s presence is a MUST in formal politics. All important laws, government rulings, policies, programmes, schemes, translations of gender commitments into financial commitments is not possible without formal representations of women who have proved themselves by working for women’s causes. Activists of the women’s movement have just remained foot-soldiers of the formal politics and those with ornamental/token presence are projected as the figure-heads. This is harming women’s concerns. Moreover, one or two women in powerful position can be easily bypassed, silenced and marginalised. Hence we need “critical minimum” of at least 1/3 representation of women in the formal politics, though our goal must be 50: 50 in the long run.

Is the threat of violence against women candidates and voters significant enough to affect women’s participation?

It’s threat of money and muscle power that discourage committed women from participating in the mainstream politics. Historically, women’s voices have been suppressed, women have been confined to domesticity and women’s concerns have been neglected. Most of the women face tremendous opposition from family, community and the male political leaders if they decide to enter electoral politics or public life. The present political leadership of any hue, in spite of its populist rhetoric, wants to keep women out of the political arena. Indian women’s lower educational level, inferior social status and lack of autonomy are reflected in their lower participation in politics. Increasing criminalisation, corruption and compromises required to sustain one’s political career also deter women from entering mainstream politics. To provide level playing field to women against this historical neglect and adverse socio-political and cultural forces, reservation of seats for women in legislature and parliament is a MUST to ensure a more participate and inclusive, a more egalitarian and sensitive citizenship for all.

What about other forms of violence faced by women in the public sphere–for instance, journalists or writers?

Women in public spheres face three types of violence: First and the most prevalent form of psychological violence is character assassination through whisper campaign, blank calls, scary SMSes and MMSes, cyber-stalking and IT-based torture, morphed images used to tarnish her personality. Second type of violence is threatening her family members to pressurize her to withdraw her article, book, film and to stop her from her future work as a writer or journalist or film maker. Third is physical harm- killing or acid attack or maiming her set an example so that fear-psychosis prevents other journalists/writers/film makers not to speak out on sensitive/uncomfortable issues to the political vested interests.

What has been the experience of women human rights defenders in your country?

Women human rights defenders have been at the receiving end of the communities in case of “honour-related crimes”, accused rapists, accused dowry murderers, accused child sexual abusers and accused members of domestic violence in all parts of the country. Individual whistle blowers have been silence using the above mentioned 3 tactics. Women human rights defenders who are part of women’s groups, national and global networks have been able to save themselves as a result of safety nets provided by their colleagues locally and globally and also due to timely media coverage. They do not have to die an anonymous deaths or are not silenced. Hence, the need for women’s rights movement.

Prajnya’s initial plans for its gender equality work were to document the work of women in the South Asian public sphere—as activists, politicians, bureaucrats, social workers and those who document this history as historians, writers, film-makers or journalists. We realised too that the biggest obstacle in women’s journeys towards the public spotlight was the threat of violence. This is why we began organising the 16 Days Campaign against Gender Violence. With this blog symposium on Violence against Women in Politics, we come full-circle to where we started.

We posit women’s participation in the public sphere both as an intrinsic good and as a right. But what are the costs that women face in order to pursue political careers? Indeed, there are two dimensions of this work—there is work that women might do within the mainstream and there is the work that they do on the margins of a mainstream space where rights are violated with rising impunity. We are placing here on a single spectrum the two categories of ‘violence against women in politics’ and threats faced by Women Human Rights Defenders, because the roots of the problem (the will to exclude) and its expression (violence) seem to be similar.

The NDI guidebook, “Not the Cost,” identifies four roles in which women stepping into the public sphere face violence: as activists, as voters, as candidates and as parliamentarians. This study classifies threats as psychological, physical, sexual and economic, while a report by the Centre for Social Research and UN Women classifies them as structural, institutional and functional. There is a growing academic literature on this question, annotated last year as part of the 2016 Prajnya 16 Days Campaign.

This year’s blog symposium has a simpler objective—to simply be a window to the world in which political women work. What is it like from their point of view? Why is it so hard for women to enter and stay the course in politics? What is the relationship between the women’s movement and mainstream politics? And of course, what are the threats that women face when they take up human rights work or enter the mainstream?

We are fortunate to have perspectives from six countries: India, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Puerto Rico (which is an American-held territory), Colombia and the US itself. Each of these are written by people who care profoundly about their contexts. Through the six, what emerges is what women can achieve when they work together—anything, from a quota for women’s reservation to a peace pact.

by Emma Kingscott

Saudi Arabia; a country known for its extreme wealth, financed by the oil and gas trade, and its extreme conservative Wahhabism ideals on which the state is governed. Yet here the reality for many women is a life of domestic incarceration. This is articulated in Wajeha Al-Huwaider’s description of Saudi Arabia as ‘the world’s largest women’s prison’.

Al-Huwaider is one of the few Saudi women who courageously stand up for the rights of women which are so explicitly denied. The suppression of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia is well documented, yet the state is still given the freedom to implement laws which prohibit women from going anywhere without the permission of a male guardian, being allowed to drive, given the right to vote or participate in sports. As a journalist and a campaigner, Al-Huwaider makes her voice heard in a state in which the authorities look to silence women. She became an activist and campaigner for women’s rights in order to free women from what she describes as the virtual jail of Saudi Arabia.

Al-Huwaider has set up a number of campaigns to attack the human right violations which women face in the state. After protesting for women’s rights in a peaceful, solo demonstration, she was arrested by the authorities and was banned from writing. She retaliated this disregard for freedom of speech by posting a video of herself driving on YouTube.

The restrictions on women’s speech and human rights in Saudi Arabia are a result of conservative interpretations of religion which promotes a patriarchal system of male guardianship and deliberate infantilization of women. Human rights activists are concerned for the implications this poses for women who are subjected to domestic violence and those who attempt to speak out against violence. Al-Huwaider for that reason founded the ‘Association for the Protection and Defence of Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia’ which protects women against domestic abuse and provides activism for women’s rights. Protection of women and women’s rights is particularly necessary in Saudi Arabia where rape isn’t criminalised and has previously punished victims for speaking out against their sexual abuse. The Human Rights Watch reported a woman who was sentenced to 6 months in prison and given 200 lashes after taking her rape case to court. She was charged with ‘illegally mingling’ and accused of attempting to aggravate and influence the judiciary.

In 2011, Al-Huwaider was imprisoned for 10 months and banned from travelling outside of Saudi Arabia for trying to save a woman who had contacted her claiming that her abusive husband has locked her and her children in the house without food. Whilst on the way to help the woman escape, she was intercepted by the police and charged for ‘supporting a wife without her husband’s knowledge, thereby undermining the marriage.’ She believes this was a deliberate hoax by the authorities in a further attempt to silence her human rights work. It is apparent the work of Al-Huwaider and other rights activists is more important than ever when it becomes apparent that helping an abused woman in Saudi Arabia is considered a crime.

Furthermore, child marriage is still a wide spread practice in Saudi Arabia and there has been cases of girls as young as 9 being married to 70 year old men. Al-Huwaider has campaigned extensively against child marriages and managed to terminate a marriage between an 8 year old girl to a 50 year old man. Al-Huwaider has been acknowledged for her advocacy of women’s rights and the Arabian Business Magazine named her one of the most powerful Arab women. Despite facing persecution from the state for her work, Wajeha Al-Huwaider remains a vehement voice for women’s human rights in Saudi Arabia.

The intent in compiling this annotated bibliography was to identify and summarise academic as well as non-academic literature easily available in the public domain on the topics of gender-based violence in politics and elections, against Women Human Rights Defenders (HRD), including violence by extremist groups.

The publication of this annotated bibliography as a public document is to assist other researchers, the donor community and others who have an interest in aforementioned arenas.

This annotated bibliography contains resources from international organisations, news articles and peer-reviewed academic publications available in the public domain. The arrangement of the bibliography has also been made in this order and not alphabetically or chronologically.

This fact sheet primarily addresses state authorities, national and international non-governmental organisations, U.N personnel, major private sector actors including transnational corporations, and HRDs themselves. The fact sheet has been divided into four sections that deal with information about what “human rights defenders” are, the violations faced by them, U.N protections and support for their work and recommendations for support and protection of their work. It has been prepared with the objective of supporting HRDs in their work.

The publication is intended for several reasons, such as to provide a rapid understanding of what a “human right defender is” and what activities he/she undertakes, support the right to defend human rights, strengthen the protection of human rights from any repercussions of their work and provide a tool for HRDs in conducting advocacy and training activities. Particular to section II, the document discusses the situation of Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) and establishes that the particular situation and role of women as HRDs require special awareness and sensitivity to both, ways in which they might be affected differently, and to some additional challenges. Importantly, this section notes that while the state is the primary perpetrator of violations against HRDs, WHRDs have often found their rights violated by members of their own communities owing to several social and cultural factors.

The publication also contains a brief analysis of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and provides an introduction to the activities and methods of work of the Special Representative of the Secretary General of the United Nations on human rights defenders.

The object of this study is to examine, analyse and understand the context, nature, extent, motives and effects, as well as increasing awareness of, and identifying best practice approaches to Violence Against Women in Politics (VAWIP) in the countries of India, Pakistan and Nepal (South Asia). In doing so, a mixed-method sequential approach and stratified sampling has been employed. The study makes use of primary as well as secondary data. One of the first studies of its kind, it explores the connection between violence and discrimination against women, women’s political participation and political violence and is an important body of knowledge for understanding the extent of VAWIP in the subcontinent.

The study forms three conceptual categories – Structural (social, political and economic), Institutional (individual institutions through which the structure manifests itself) and Functional (efforts challenging the structural features of the socio-political devices creating and perpetuating VAWIP) – to assign the discussion on existing violence, women’s participation in politics, the challenges they face and the attempts to regulate such violence. The study asserts that patriarchy at the structural level, and all its socio-cultural ramifications, are reinforced at the institutional level and are the key factors that lead to VAWIP.

This study makes use of other important bodies of knowledge such as publications by South Asian Partnership and Centre for Social Research for understanding the nature and extent of VAWIP and for developing policy briefs as well as policy level advocacy to influence electoral reforms and creating an enabling environment for women’s engagement with politics. The primary research validates some important research findings of the secondary research used in this study, particularly that social and economic disparities affect gender equilibrium in politics, leading to a deprived political agency, of particularly those women who are not connected to a political family.

Importantly, the study establishes that there is a sparsity of dialogue on the topic of VAWIP, and the political system is in almost complete denial of the existence of VAWIP. It further states that this silence and limited understanding of the topic is compounded by the lack of structures to address Violence against Women (VAW) and even more broadly, violence in politics.

This guidebook has been published under the VAWIP program implemented by South Asian Partnership (SAP) International to create a favorable environment for women’s political participation in South Asia. The guidebook is intended to provide information and support the Surveillance System (SuS) developed to monitor, document, communicate, refer and advocate against VAWIP.

The guidebook is intended to provide some basic information on the development of, and support the day-to-day practical process of implementation of, the SuS at the regional level for the use of Watch Group Members, SAP Nationals and partners who are the key stakeholders of this system to understand its various levels and processes for proper functioning. The guidebook has been structured in a simple manner and written in a language that is easy to understand, and allows its users to devise a step-by-step action plan relevant to their work.

Apart from being an introduction to the VAWIP program and the SuS, its phases and areas of information, reporting of surveillance, structure of the system and the roles and responsibilities of watch groups, the guidebook also introduces the reader to the South Asian political system and the state of women’s participation in it.

This report has been published in order to reveal the dimensions of VAWIP and attempts to document the realities of the sufferings of women trying to achieve a career in politics. Importantly, the publication holds a mirror to the issues pertaining to the structural form of violence affecting women at various levels of South Asian society.

The report has made use of National Situation Analysis reports, Case Study Reports and other documents prepared by the SAP national and partner organisations and in a unique manner attempts to understand the nature and form of violence against female politicians in a region having a paradoxically complex history of oppression, female leadership in top political positions and mobilisation of women at the grassroots level.

While the study does not cover all the dimensions of the issues of VAWIP, it is intended to act as a stepping stone towards building a new arena for addressing the issues of VAWIP and primarily acts as the breaker of silence on the issue. More importantly, the study is a breakthrough in clarifying some deep-seated myths and misconceptions associated with violence against women in the public domain. For example, it debunks the myth that the perpetrators of violence are social miscreants, perverts or thugs by its finding that government officials, political representatives at the higher echelons and law enforcing agencies top this list (effectively leaving little room for accountability).

The study also makes recommendations to the state, civil society organisations, media, as well as political parties. It urges all stakeholders to act as change agents and work towards a brighter future for women in politics.

This handbook has been published in order to clarify terminologies and concepts and compiling definitions and scope of terms and concepts relating to VAWIP. It has been published by SAP International in collaboration with national SAPs partner civil society organisation working on issue of VAWIP since 2006.

The handbook uses a variety of sources such as books, academic publications, UN conventions and other official UN publications, and material available on websites in the public-domain. Organised alphabetically, the handbook elaborates on concepts such as ‘Affirmative Action’, ‘Coping Mechanisms’, ‘Culture of Silence’ or ‘Women’s Qualitative Participation’ among others. It is interesting to note that this handbook is placed in the context of the challenges faced in South Asia in terms of effective democratic governance as the countries cope with demands of global economy and pressures form citizens for increased participation and representation.

The handbook has been published with the intent and object of being useful to all readers but particularly to those working on the issues of violence against women, women in politics and political violence.

This is a research report published by the Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) and dealing with the topics of safety and security of WHRDs. This research report has been formed by a consultative process that has included individual conversations as well as consultations that brought together WHRDs who defend human rights including women’s rights, in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. The report provides an insight into the complex situation of women who face threats and violence resulting from their work defending Human rights.

The report does not focus solely on the aspect of physical violence but establishes a need for creation of an enabling environment for WHRDs to work in. The report asserts that the violence experienced by WHRDs, as well as the impact it has on their lives and work, makes it imperative to adopt mechanisms for protection that address the different needs and realities of WHRDs.

Divided in five parts, the publication deals with various aspects of security and protection of WHRDs such as analysing risk factors, exploring protection measures, responsibility of the state, identification and description of regional and international human rights mechanisms in place to protect defenders and providing recommendations for various actors such as states, regional and international human rights protection mechanisms, international cooperation agencies and donors, and national and transnational corporations to develop gender-specific protection initiatives, and what “effective protection” means to WHRDs. Thus, the publication has a strong focus on protection initiatives put in place by the State as well as regional and international multilateral institutions and draws on the experiences and realities of WHRDs in relying on these protection strategies and mechanisms.

The publication emphasises the need to advance an integrated concept of security that goes beyond the mere physical protection of an individual. The report reiterates the need for protection measures and programs to take into account the historical, cultural, political and social contexts in which WHRDs live and address their specific needs and realities. Importantly, the report highlights the limitations of the term “security” by stating that it is often associated with militarization, whereas the word “protection” is often understood as having paternalistic connotations.

This report has been published with the objective of initiating discussions on various thematic issues, including definitions of WHRDs in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and how they relate to definitions used by United Nations Mechanisms, including the U.N special Rapporteur on the Situation of HRDs. The report establishes a feminist methodology for the research and has been created with the aim of being a collective and participatory effort based on objective investigation and analysis. The report also aims at addressing and unpacking common problems in definitions and reflecting a culture of reaction while seeking to use women’s voices as the main source of report narratives.

The report places the situation of WHRDs in the MENA region within the context of displacement, secrecy, constant assault and disrupting identity and conventional (legal approaches and social pressure) and unconventional (ICTs and methods affecting social and financial mobility) modes of targeting WHRDs. With the aim of creating a category of WHRDs with a clear set of rules and criteria to be inclusive and non-discriminatory, the report sheds light on the dilemma of the definition of WHRDs. The discussion highlights an evidential gap related to “neutrality” between the local and international circles with regard to who can identify as a defender in general. The report asserts that the lack of knowledge and awareness of these concepts is problematic and finds that definitions of who can conceptually or theoretically constitute a WHRD are very restrictive, and contribute to excluding a lot of women who are part of these global movements, based on narrow understandings and technicalities.

The report aims to set up a basis for a holistic strategy for prevention of violence against and protection of WHRDs in this region by focusing on components such as communal approach, communal research, tackling urgent issues with time, technology, access to privacy and safe spaces, access to rehabilitation, and establishing a culture of well-being. The report also presents a comprehensive set of recommendations addressing stakeholders on various levels. Prevention is at the core of these recommendations and proposals focus on maintaining and sustaining collaboration between different agencies to achieve the anticipated results through various tools such as legal mechanisms, research, long term programing with a concentration on well-being, access and dissemination of information through safe digital spaces.

This news article reports on the study by the Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU) being released during the group’s annual assembly in Geneva. The article reports that over 80% of the participants had experienced some form of psychological or sexual harassment or violence, as found by the study with fifty-five Members of Parliaments (MPs) from across the globe.

The article put the report in the context of current global developments such as the U.S presidential elections and points to the abuse female politicians face, through social media, by language used by colleagues and voters. The article notes the conclusions of the report, stating that the sheer pervasiveness of sexual discrimination, from humiliating language to harassment to real violence, is preventing many elected women from carrying out their duties in freedom and safety.

The article reports on the statement made by Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, the head of U.N Women’s advocacy agency in Salvador, Brazil, stating that armed extremist and fundamentalist groups worldwide are eroding women’s right and undermining gains made in gender equality in recent years, citing militant groups such as Boko Haram in Nigeria (kidnapping of 276 girls from secondary school in Chibok) to Islamic state in Iraq and Syria (Yazidi people of northern Iraq where women and girls have been brutalised).

The article also noted the statement that fundamentalists and extremists have intensified attacks on groups that campaign for gender equality and defend human rights, globally.

This paper has been presented by the author at the Regional Conference of Women Human Rights Defenders held in 2009. The author begins by accommodating the definition of WHRDs with Article 1 of Declaration of Human Rights Defenders and proceeds to state that HRDs have several characteristics in common, even though they may have differing reasons in taking up this role. The author then notes the different areas of work that WHRDs cover, the different categories they fall in and the need for special attention and focus in order to ensure their protection. The author discusses the environment in which WHRDs conduct their activities and several gender-specific risks they face owing to the manipulative use of culture, tradition, custom, misinterpretations of religion, social pressures as well as victimisation within the private space.

The author then discusses the “Empowerment of WHRD in Bangladesh Project” by Odhikar, an organisation that has trained and enhanced activities of more than two hundred HRDs across Bangladesh. She states that the project has been aimed at training and enhancing the capacity of local WHRDs in four areas of Bangladesh, and to carry out fact finding missions and monitor the status of cases involving acid violence, rape and dowry related violence. She states that one of the outcomes of the program was the creation of a network of victims, WHRDs, local lawyer groups and the police. The author also states that among the obstacles faced while implementing the program, non-cooperation and inaction by the police was starkly visible.

In conclusion, the author states that the principles of gender equality and non-discrimination of women are vital to protection of WHRDs, and that the state must take measures to correct gender biases in their legal systems, repeal biased laws and policies and modify social attitudes that sponsor gender inequality.

This article surveys how the concept of VAWIP has been defined by academics and practitioners across Latin America, and notes that it is largely in terms of physical and psychological violence. The article draws on secondary data and research from various disciplines and proposes the expansion of the concept of VAWIP. The articles begins by establishing that there is a major shift towards gender equality in elected office, and measures such as gender quotas have been put in place to achieve better results. However, the article notes that gendered political environments continue to create difficulties and affirmative action, such as quotas, can cause a backlash which may take the form of violence. The author notes that this has caused concerns among international non-governmental organizations across the world, particularly in Latin America.

The article is divided into four parts. The first section addresses the “state of the art” across Latin America in terms of debate around “political violence and political harassment against women” along with tracing the development of this dialogue. In the second section, the article engages with various academic literature to distinguish VAWIP from related concepts, and theorises the causes behind its occurrence and the significance of the particular forms it takes.

The third section of the article incorporates feminist and non-feminist research and scholarship on violence and contends that apart from physical and psychological violence, economic and symbolic violence should be included in the definition of VAWIP. In this section, the authors also provide the reader with examples of all four types of violence to substantiate the proposal of the revised framework. The final section of the article considers theoretical and practical implications of opting for different definitions. The authors assert that widening of the definition is important to fully understand the nature of the issue as well as for developing effective solutions for it. They emphasise that a comprehensive approach best tackles the issue.

The article reveals the existence of widespread resistance to full political incorporation of women globally, but particularly in Latin America. Most importantly, the article asserts that VAWIP poses a threat to core democratic values when public officials are prevented by way of intimidation and coercion to prevent them from performing their duties. Thus, the authors assert that VAWIP not only threatens to hollow out national and international commitments to gender-balanced decision-making, but can also affect the integrity of the political system itself. They emphasise that attending to these issues is important not only for women interested in pursuing a political career, but also citizens and the academic community at large.

This article has been published as a response to Jeniffer Piscopo’s (2016) critical assessment of the article “Gender and political violence in Latin America-Concepts, debates and solutions” by Krook & Sanin (2016). This article addresses the misinterpretations made by Piscopo and also augments the original article with their thinking informed by seminar discussions, conversations, readings, news items and original interviews conducted in the year preceding the publication of this article.

The authors argue against Piscopo who states that VAWIP is simply a subcategory of violence in politics more generally. Piscopo states that it is a phenomenon which is explained by weak state capacity and criminal justice systems and do not violate only women’s political rights but also other laws and legislations. The authors contend that VAWIP is distinct from violence in politics and that it seeks to prevent women’s participation as women. They also recognise the prevalence of this issue and the influence that different contexts have on the content and prevalence of different categories of violent acts. Further, the authors assert that VAWIP is more than just a criminal issue and one which poses a serious challenge to democracy, human rights and gender equality.

The authors argue against Piscopo’s assessment that scholars have accepted activists’ definitions at face value and state that emerging academic studies bring new tools to bear on the definitions of the phenomenon of VAWIP. The authors further make a very important assertion that solutions to address the occurrence of VAWIP should be pursued not only by the state but also by a host of different actors and stakeholders. They note that while the issue of VAWIP is being taken up globally and gaining ground speedily, academic studies are still nascent and emerge primarily out of Latin America. In conclusion, the authors encourage scholars and activists not to abandon the concept of VAWIP and instead work together to bring this issue into focus.

Bardall, G. (2013). Gender-specific election violence: the role of information and communication technologies. Stability: International Journal of Security and Development, 2(3).DOI: http://www.stabilityjournal.org/article/view/sta.cs/Retrieved on 2016 November, 21.

The author begins by establishing that the influence of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) has paralleled development of women’s political participation globally. The author also establishes that women’s experiences of election violence fundamentally differ from men and may take place within the public as well as private spheres, and are distinguishable by their forms and frequencies. The author notes that women experience one-third as many direct physical attacks as men but are three times as likely to experience psychological violence. Further, the author asserts that, coupled with the threats of physical and sexual violence, these forms of election violence are the most devastating for women and are most often orchestrated through social media.

Giving evidence of acts that inflict psychological harm or the fear of it, the author notes that ICTs are often used as tools of gender-specific and electoral violence against women in political life or holding public office. The author also cites examples from Kenya, U.S.A, and U.K among others while discussing the various ways in which social media is used as a tool for intimidation or incitement for violence against women in elections (VAWE). The author notes the moral implications for this kind of violence carry a higher social cost for women owing to the imbalances in what constitutes ‘moral behavior’ for male and female politicians. The author also discusses the benefits that the perpetrator has by way of legal and moral impunity due to the difficulty of regulating and punishing such attacks.

Interestingly, the author also asserts that the same ICTs offer innovative solutions for prevention and mitigation of violence such as monitoring and documentation, education, providing platforms for raising awareness and through empowerment and advocacy. The author notes that one of the biggest advantages of ICTs has been to collect and document incidents of VAWE which helps in recognising its existence and thus establishing a baseline for progress.

In conclusion, the author states that innovative use of ICTs for combatting election and political-related violence against women still have far to go in catching up the threats posed by these ICTs to cause violence against women. She emphasises that it is necessary to understand the underlying dangers presented by social media, and encourages elections-rights and gender-rights advocates and practitioners to integrate best practices from their mutual fields in doing so.